MOHAMMED TRADING COMPANY vs The Assistant Commissioner

Court
Madras High Court

WP No. 42713 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 42713, 42715 & 42717 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012336682026}
AND
WMP NO. 48000, 48003 & 48006 OF 2026
Mohammed Trading Company
GSTIN 33AAPPI4675L1Z7
Represented by its Proprietor
Mohamedelias Ibrahim
27/9, Ram, K.N.P. Layout Main Road,
Kangayam Road, Tiruppur-641 604
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The Assistant Commissioner
Bazaar Assessment Circle,
Tiruppur-II
..Respondent(s)
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying
for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Form GST
DRC-07 bearing reference no. ZD330226061446J dated 09.02.2026 for the tax
period 2024-2025 issued by the Respondent and quash the same
call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Form GST
DRC-07 bearing reference no. ZD330226209326P dated 24.02.2026 for the tax
period 2020-2021 issued by the Respondent and quash the same
call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Form GST
DRC-07 bearing reference no. ZD330226260116R dated 28.02.2026 for the tax
period 2022-2023 issued by the Respondent and quash the same
__________
Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )

WP No. 42713 of 2026
For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Prasath, for Mr.Syed Abdul Wakeel
For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Sivaraman, GA
Order
These writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders dated
09.02.2026, 24.02.2026 & 28.02.2026 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr.B.Sivaraman, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf
of the respondent.
3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petitions are taken up for
disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in these case,
all notices/communications were uploaded by the respondent in the GST
common portal. Since the petitioner had failed to view the portal, they were not
aware of the said notices, due to which, they failed to file their reply within the
time. Under these circumstances, the impugned orders came to be passed by the
respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the
petitioner. Hence, these petitions have been filed.
__________
Page2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )

WP No. 42713 of 2026
5. Further, he would submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay
25% of the disputed tax amount, in each petitions, to the respondent. Hence, he
requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case
before the respondent by setting aside the impugned order.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent
would submit that the respondent had uploaded the notices in the GST Online
Portal. But the petitioner failed to avail the said opportunity. Further, he has
fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the
petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Therefore, he requested this
Court to remit the matter back to the respondent, subject to the payment of 25%
of the disputed tax amount by the petitioner.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent and
also perused the materials available on record.
8. In the cases on hand, it is evident that the show cause notice was
uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, he was not aware
of the issuance of the said show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and
the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. In such
circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned assessment order
__________
Page3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )

WP No. 42713 of 2026
came to be passed without affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the
petitioner, confirming the proposals contained in the show cause notice.
9. No doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service,
but, the Officer, who is sending the repeated reminders, despite the fact that no
response from the petitioner to the show cause notices etc., should have applied
his/her mind and explored the possibility of sending notices by way of other
modes prescribed in Section 169 of the GST Act, which are also the valid mode
of service under the Act, otherwise it will not be an effective service, rather, it
would only amount to fulfilling the empty formalities. Merely passing an ex
parte order by fulfilling the empty formalities will not serve any useful purpose
and the same will only pave way for multiplicity of litigations, not only wasting
the time of the Officer concerned, but also the precious time of the Appellate
Authority/Tribunal and this Court as well.
10. Thus, when there is no response from the tax payer to the notice sent
through a particular mode, the Officer who is issuing notices should strictly
explore the possibilities of sending notices through some other mode as
prescribed in Section 169(1) of the Act, preferably by way of RPAD, which
would ultimately achieve the object of the GST Act. Therefore, this Court finds
that there has been lack of efforts in exploring the available opportunities to
serve the notices/orders etc., effectively on the petitioner.
__________
Page4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )

WP No. 42713 of 2026
11. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the petitioner is ready and willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount, in
each petitions, to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court is
inclined to set aside the impugned orders dated 09.02.2026, 24.02.2026 &
28.02.2026 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the
following order:-
(i) The impugned orders dated 09.02.2026, 24.02.2026
& 28.02.2026 are set aside and the matters are remanded to
the respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the
petitioner shall pay 25% of the disputed tax amount, in each
petitions, to the respondent, within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The setting
aside of the impugned order will take effect from the date of
payment of the said amount.
(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along
with the required documents, if any, within a period of three
weeks from the date of payment of amount as stated above.
(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the
petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same and issue a
14 days clear notice, by fixing the date of personal hearing, to
the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on
merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the
petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.
__________
Page5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )

WP No. 42713 of 2026
12. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
28-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
nsa
To
The Assistant Commissioner
Bazaar Assessment Circle,
Tiruppur-II
__________
Page6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )

WP No. 42713 of 2026
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.
nsa
WP No. 42713 of 2026
AND
WP NO. 42715 OF 2026,WP NO. 42717 OF 2026,WMP NO. 48000 OF
2026,WMP NO. 48003 OF 2026,WMP NO. 48006 OF 2026
28-10-2026
__________
Page7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )